Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Initial "Beged Kefet" consonants always have a...

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
  • To: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Initial "Beged Kefet" consonants always have a...
  • Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 12:51:21 +0300

I was simply putting forward a provisional hypothesis.

fair enough

I found that this explained all of Joel's list (consonants only) except for this one case. At this point we have two alternatives: one is to refine the hypothesis, perhaps along the lines which you suggest; the other is to write off occasional exceptions as due to some kind of corruption.

With my background in logic, I always hesistate to dismiss anything as an error. Quite often, what seems wrong or insignificant, turns explicable and meaningful. Thus, the example of Kturah - Hetturah is very instructive, and demonstrates quite a few phonological rules. It showed to me a much simpler way to explain the difference between vocal and silent shcwa than I suggested before: namely, all schwas result from reduction of vowels; pretonic schwas lose their sound to the accented vowel, antepenult schwas preserve their sound.
This, by the way, helps us to determine that Sephardic accents, not Ashkenazic are correct.

But my point remains, that my provisional hypothesis accounts for nearly all of the changes without requiring that Hebrew pronunciation has changed greatly since LXX times.

Absolutely.

Vadim Cherny




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page